Yeah, some posters (in all fanbases) are utterly predictable in their responses depending on whether the person interviewed paints their favourite player in positive or negative light.

Personally, I really liked Janowicz's game (his touch and movement especially) from what I've seen from him in Paris last year and while some may see this interview as being borderline trash talking, I think tennis could use more of that and prefer it to drone PR responses (even though I largely disagree with his views).

As long as he also walks the walk, tennis could really use more promising young guns at the moment, that was always one of the most exciting part of tennis for me as a viewer (new balls generation at the beginning of 2000s, Nadal beating Fed in 2004 Miami, Novak reaching 2006 FO QF, Murray beating Fed in 2006 Cincy etc.).

Yeah, some posters (in all fanbases) are utterly predictable in their responses depending on whether the person interviewed paints their favourite player in positive or negative light.

Personally, I really liked Janowicz's game (his touch and movement especially) from what I've seen from him in Paris last year and while some may see this interview as being borderline trash talking, I think tennis could use more of that and prefer it to drone PR responses (even though I largely disagree with his views).

As long as he also walks the walk, tennis could really use more promising young guns at the moment, that was always one of the most exciting part of tennis for me as a viewer (new balls generation at the beginning of 2000s, Nadal beating Fed in 2004 Miami, Novak reaching 2006 FO QF, Murray beating Fed in 2006 Cincy etc.).

Click to expand...

Haha so true. Personally I have no problem with Janowicz, he's entitled to his opinion after all. I wish him the best, hopefully he can do something again this year. I think we're all becoming a bit desperate for someone else to breakthrough really :-|.

I'm a fan of the entire Top 4, and Jerzy, and I take no offense to anything he's said. I hope he continues to speak his mind. More than anything, I hope his game continues to come together so he can hang onto and rise a little in the rankings. I think he's playing in Rotterdam. Let's hope he make it far in the tournament and gives us a few good sound bites along the way.

And so we see what the ATP tour really think of federer. He is unnatural (playing long schedules as a 31-year-old) and extremely arrogant (said the players' income from the slams was "OK"). Completely out of touch with reality and it just shows how corrupt the ATP are letting him be president of the players' council. I think Jerzy Janowicz is becoming one of my favourite players.

Federer could be worse. He could have agreed to Nadal's idiotic 2 year ranking idea. Can you imagine how annoyed janowicz would be then with his ranking still so low? Lucky escape by fed.

Click to expand...

A 2-year ranking system is one of the most interesting suggestions I have ever heard in the players' council (and no surprise that Nadal, the most creative thinker in tennis history) came up with it. Players who have consistently been great but have been injured for a while shouldn't be punished because of it, but players like Janowicz, who have done nothing but make 3rd rounds of slams (not impressive) and get to the final of the most unimportant and boring Masters 1000 tournament in world history (next to Shanghai) don't get rewarded for small, explosive runs in a tournament with a slightly high points value. They should be consistently getting good results to prove they can make an impact in the tennis world.

A 2-year ranking system is one of the most interesting suggestions I have ever heard in the players' council (and no surprise that Nadal, the most creative thinker in tennis history) came up with it. Players who have consistently been great but have been injured for a while shouldn't be punished because of it, but players like Janowicz, who have done nothing but make 3rd rounds of slams (not impressive) and get to the final of the most unimportant and boring Masters 1000 tournament in world history (next to Shanghai) don't get rewarded for small, explosive runs in a tournament with a slightly high points value. They should be consistently getting good results to prove they can make an impact in the tennis world.

And so we see what the ATP tour really think of federer. He is unnatural (playing long schedules as a 31-year-old) and extremely arrogant (said the players' income from the slams was "OK"). Completely out of touch with reality and it just shows how corrupt the ATP are letting him be president of the players' council. I think Jerzy Janowicz is becoming one of my favourite players.

Fed "OK with it" is an uninformed opinion from JJ! He has fought for and gained large increases for early-round losers at the majors. Someone needs to put a factsheet in front of him and repeat his "how many times" rant while he gains reading comprehension skills.

A 2-year ranking system is one of the most interesting suggestions I have ever heard in the players' council (and no surprise that Nadal, the most creative thinker in tennis history) came up with it. Players who have consistently been great but have been injured for a while shouldn't be punished because of it, but players like Janowicz, who have done nothing but make 3rd rounds of slams (not impressive) and get to the final of the most unimportant and boring Masters 1000 tournament in world history (next to Shanghai) don't get rewarded for small, explosive runs in a tournament with a slightly high points value. They should be consistently getting good results to prove they can make an impact in the tennis world.

Fed "OK with it" is an uninformed opinion from JJ! He has fought for and gained large increases for early-round losers at the majors. Someone needs to put a factsheet in front of him and repeat his "how many times" rant while he gains reading comprehension skills.

Jerzy is probably right , I think Djokovic is pretty fake and although I like Federer other players have also commented on how aloof he seems to other players (Lleyton Hewitt, for example) although he is generally a nice guy.

Doesn't really make sense. Jerzy seems like a moron. Federer has always been for the players, especially lower ranked players - eg. being against a stupid 2 year ranking system which would really hurt lower ranked players not allowing them to breakthrough as easily.

A 2-year ranking system is one of the most interesting suggestions I have ever heard in the players' council (and no surprise that Nadal, the most creative thinker in tennis history) came up with it. Players who have consistently been great but have been injured for a while shouldn't be punished because of it, but players like Janowicz, who have done nothing but make 3rd rounds of slams (not impressive) and get to the final of the most unimportant and boring Masters 1000 tournament in world history (next to Shanghai) don't get rewarded for small, explosive runs in a tournament with a slightly high points value. They should be consistently getting good results to prove they can make an impact in the tennis world.

Click to expand...

no, babies who cant play a full year without getting injured SHOULD be punished. Also maybe fed thought guys like janowicz shouldn't get extra money for making the 3rd round of a slam (not impressive) and should have to earn that with constantly results?

Also dos you know Nadal just made a groundbreaking discovery in quantum physics? Last week he cured cancer. Next week its alchemy.

He didn't. It's just that unlike some people who just like to run their mouths about things, Federer actually likes to make something happen. So he doesn't usually talk about things in public but works on them officially through the players council.

There is a reason he has been consistently voted president for years. His diplomacy works very well.

We already know that Federer is arrogant and snobbish, and always has an excuse for every loss, like back pain, which is cleverly communicated without appearing to be an excuse. Unlike Nadal, he did not support more pay for lower-ranked players, because he made enough money in a weak era. That is why Nadal is seen as genuine, caring and humble, and also skilled enough to beat Federer any time on any surface. Janowicz is just saying how it is.

i think players need to speak their minds more. especially when it comes to things like rules, MTO abuse, pay and such. these issues are critical to the sport and are worth discussing but you'll never hear about them in public... the sponsors, tourny directors and national bureaucrats don't want the fuss.

We already know that Federer is arrogant and snobbish, and always has an excuse for every loss, like back pain, which is cleverly communicated without appearing to be an excuse. Unlike Nadal, he did not support more pay for lower-ranked players, because he made enough money in a weak era. That is why Nadal is seen as genuine, caring and humble, and also skilled enough to beat Federer any time on any surface. Janowicz is just saying how it is.

He didn't. It's just that unlike some people who just like to run their mouths about things, Federer actually likes to make something happen. So he doesn't usually talk about things in public but works on them officially through the players council.

There is a reason he has been consistently voted president for years. His diplomacy works very well.

Click to expand...

riiiight...

and he only selflessly plays D.C. when his country really needs him, it was just coincidence that Olympic eligibility required as much.

A 2-year ranking system is one of the most interesting suggestions I have ever heard in the players' council (and no surprise that Nadal, the most creative thinker in tennis history) came up with it. Players who have consistently been great but have been injured for a while shouldn't be punished because of it, but players like Janowicz, who have done nothing but make 3rd rounds of slams (not impressive) and get to the final of the most unimportant and boring Masters 1000 tournament in world history (next to Shanghai) don't get rewarded for small, explosive runs in a tournament with a slightly high points value.

We already know that Federer is arrogant and snobbish, and always has an excuse for every loss, like back pain, which is cleverly communicated without appearing to be an excuse. Unlike Nadal, he did not support more pay for lower-ranked players, because he made enough money in a weak era. That is why Nadal is seen as genuine, caring and humble, and also skilled enough to beat Federer any time on any surface. Janowicz is just saying how it is.

Click to expand...

What? Is this person for real? I love how others can psychoanalyze others, that is arrogant.

We already know that Federer is arrogant and snobbish, and always has an excuse for every loss, like back pain, which is cleverly communicated without appearing to be an excuse. Unlike Nadal, he did not support more pay for lower-ranked players, because he made enough money in a weak era. That is why Nadal is seen as genuine, caring and humble, and also skilled enough to beat Federer any time on any surface. Janowicz is just saying how it is.

Click to expand...

This is B.S. Completely untrue. Whatever Janowicz said is his opinion and we don't even know if he said that because I've yet to see the actual interview. Just some recreation on Twitter. Guess what? Twitter's been wrong many many many times. Show me the proof!